Fire and screaming? Pfeh… nothing but fluffy bunnies around here dude…
Fatima Day huh? Hope the world doesn’t end in fire and screaming…
If you listened to the pope’s stuff in Fatima today one might have missed quite a lot of the whole controversy. You might have come away thinking Fatima is all about sharing, and encountering, and fluffy bunnies. I’ve never been much of a Fatima person. It all seemed like a very deep rabbit hole it was best to stay well out of. But I never thought it was about “encountering”. I was pretty sure the Queen of Heaven wouldn’t be wasting our time. Or her own.
I’m good with the idea of praying the Rosary every day, but you know how it is… More of a do as I say not as I do sort of thing. But even though I remain pretty lazy about it, even I have started to step up that end of things a bit lately. Somethingsomething North Korea… something… Islamic invasion…Turkey… Vladimir Putin invading Ukraine… Pope’s a blaspheming heretic… “etc…”
So, while everyone else is getting a little apocalyptically concerned, today we have the pope denying, again, that there’s anything to see here. No no no NO! It’s not like that AT ALL! Errything’s copacetic, man. It’s all groovy in Bergoglio’s [New] World [Order]! Put on some the love beads and pass that doobie over here. All ya gotta do is stop being so rigid, man!
So, unsurprising that we’re getting the usual fakery today: stuff that sounds like the Faith to untrained ears, using the sort of language we might expect, but always mixed up and using terms in ways they were not supposed to be used…
It just wouldn’t be Bergoglio without the leeeetlest bit of blasphemous heresy thrown in for spice, right? I mean, the rest of it’s a perfectly fine glass of orange juice; that little tiny bit of arsenic couldn’t possibly hurt, right?
“Pilgrims with Mary… But which Mary? A teacher of the spiritual life, the first to follow Jesus on the “narrow way” of the cross by giving us an example, or a Lady “unapproachable” and impossible to imitate? A woman “blessed because she believed” always and everywhere in God’s words (cf. Lk 1:42.45), or a “plaster statue” from whom we beg favours at little cost? The Virgin Mary of the Gospel, venerated by the Church at prayer, or a Mary of our own making: one who restrains the arm of a vengeful God; one sweeter than Jesus the ruthless judge; one more merciful than the Lamb slain for us?“
Yeah, I don’t know what he’s on about either, but hey… Frankly, “Blessed because she believed” is Pelagian (the actual Pelagian, not the new kind). Nothing about the “Immaculate Conception” rings a bell…? Anything? Nothing? Nothing from St. John Damascene… “Mary was predestined before all time…”
Nonono! All that language is out. Read the documents!
Just in case any reader is about to have a conversation with a Catholic “conservative” about the pope’s wonderful, uplifting and deeply spiritual reflections at Fatima, (…you hateful, holier-than-thou Trad!…) here’s some theological hot chili sauce for your discussions.
Someone, an actual Catholic theologian apparently, who seems to be one of those “there was nothing wrong with Vatican II… it was all the translaaaaayyyshuns!” … people, comments helpfully:
Since the close of Vatican II, and despite that Council’s very firm reaffirmation of both mysteries in the traditional sense, treatment of the predestination of Mary has disappeared from Mariological study. Some expositions of the Immaculate Conception have either 1) minimized its binding dogmatic character with calls for its “dedogmatization,” viz., its reduction to the status of a thesis pertaining to an unimportant and perhaps out-dated theological system no longer binding in faith on all Catholics; 2) downplayed or even denied its character as a unique privilege of Mary alone, and so reducing the Mother of God to the status of just another woman; or 3) totally naturalized the privilege (along the lines of the ancient heretic Pelagius) by eliminating any reference in its definition to original sin.
The article notes that this trend started with Cardinal Avery Dulles, the American theologian most famous for his assertion that the death penalty is never permissible… Hhmmm… sounds familiar somehow… (Some day I’ll tell y’all the funny little story of the time I met Cardinal Dulles at a conference in Chicago.)
And, as always, no major Marian feast or event can be allowed to go by without getting in another nasty little hack at the simple pious devotions of the faithful, those losers… always sitting around counting their Rosaries, asking favours from plaster statues without cost…amirite?
And doesn’t it kind of sort of sound like he’s calling the actual Our Lady of Fatima – you know, the one with all the warnings about Russia and fire falling from the sky and wiping out a large portion of humanity – a fraud? And La Salette. And Quito. And Akita… and pretty much all of them..? Who needs that Lady Clothed in the Sun to hold back the arm of divine wrath? Not us! We’re the NEW Catholics! It’s a New world! It’s a whole New Order! No one sins anymore! That language is out! Read the documents!
Lalala… I’ll just leave this here…
(Doctor of the Church, St. Alphonsus Liguori, The Glories of Mary, in case anyone needs a reference.)
So, what say we take a look at what she actually said in the, you know, actual Church-approved apparition…
In the apparition of July 13, Our Lady warned the three children — Jacinta, Francisco and Lucy — that if people did not stop offending God, He would punish the world “by means of war, hunger and persecution of the Church and of the Holy Father”. And Russia will be the instrument of this chastisement.
“To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart.” This must be done by the pope in conjunction with all the bishops of the world before 1960. If this were done, Russia would be converted and a period of peace would be given to the world. If Her requests were not granted, “Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, raising up wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer and various nations will be annihilated.”
Nope, no fluffy bunnies under here.
So, I think there are still some weirdos claiming that the Consecration has been done. Really, if someone says that, ask them if they know what Russia’s per-capita abortion rate is like. (Hint: highest in the world… yes, more than China.)
So, let’s see what we’ve got here.
- war and hunger? Check.
- persecution of the Church? Check.
- This is Brian McCall: not crazy; not a heretic. 50 million people are killed by abortion around the world every year. Every. Year.
- The annihilation of nations? Working on it.
And that’s just the approved, official, one-time-only message from 1917. It doesn’t include all the other, WAY more terrifying stuff Sr. Lucy said after. Here’s an excerpt from her interview with Father Fuentes at the Coimbra convent on December 26, 1957.
“Father, the Most Holy Virgin is very sad because no one has paid any attention to Her Message, neither the good nor the bad. The good continue on their way, but without giving any importance to Her Message. The bad, not seeing the punishment of God actually falling on them, continue their life of sin without even caring about the Message. But believe me Father, God will chastise the world, and this will be in a terrible manner. The punishment from Heaven is imminent.”
And here’s her letter to Cardinal Caffarra:
“The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid, because anyone who works for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be fought and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue. However, Our Lady has already crushed its head.”
The thing is, Bergoglio and his friends don’t take the Faith seriously, so of course there’s nothing to see in Fatima. They don’t think it’s sophisticated and grown up to believe all that make-believe, childhood fairy tale religious stuff. We know they don’t. Everything they’re doing, everything they have done already, everything they want to do shows us that.
But I’m pretty sure Our Lady takes it quite seriously indeed.
Look, I understand the reluctance to go down the Marian Apparition rabbit hole. But there are a few, the approved ones, that are pretty safe, and honestly, they all more or less say the same things. I agree that there is a glut of WAY too much information on Fatima on the internet, but it’s pretty easy to suss out the basics. Heck, there’s even a Wiki page that’s nice and straightforward. And there’s not a fluffy bunny in sight.
So, back to the wacky-blasphemous hijinks in Fatima today. These are really just more indications of the whole thing we’ve been mapping out for four years. The Bergoglian regime programmatically downplays, ignores or lies about the supernatural. It’s what they do. While they’re doing that, they’re also blowing as much smoke as possible to cover it up with a miasma of confusion and contention.
To understand what’s happening today in Portugal, and every other day in the Bergoglian New-NewChurch, we have to understand how they use language. Words for such people are not what they are for us. They are not phonemes intended to symbolize real things, put together comprehensibly in order to convey meaning and represent truth.
The only thing Frank the Deconstructionist uses words for is manipulation aimed at increasing or holding onto power. Lessons learned from Chairman Mao: power is the only thing that matters. Never, ever forget the assessment of Bergoglio made by Msgr. Adriano Bernardini, the former Nuncio to Argentina, someone who would know: “He’s a man that’s sick with power.”
According to this Maoist theory, words are just tools used to manipulate people: “We will conquer the world because you fools think that words are labels that are properly or improperly pasted onto things. We know that words are little dynamite sticks in people’s minds and we hold the fuse.”
The most important thing to look for in order to understand what’s going on is his actions, not his words.
Other people are slowly starting to wake up to this use of language for something other than conveying meaning. Here’s a useful little post from the Stream that talks a bit about it, using my favourite Mao quote about the “little sticks of dynamite”:
Tyranny misuses language in order to disguise the true agenda which is to control people. A recent example is using the word ‘migrant’ or ‘refugee’ instead of illegal immigrant. These words connote very different thoughts and in so doing veil the truth of what is happening on America’s southern border. Language is often employed not to convey the truth, but to betray and deceive the public. In Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky wrote, “He who controls the language controls the masses.”
Now, take this Alinkskyist principle and apply it to the teachings of the Church, and what do you get?
“For amongst the chief points of their teaching is this which they deduce from the principle of vital immanence; that religious formulas, to be really religious and not merely theological speculations, ought to be living and to live the life of the religious sentiment.
“… In other words, it is necessary that the primitive formula be accepted and sanctioned by the heart; and similarly the subsequent work from which spring the secondary formulas must proceed under the guidance of the heart. Hence it comes that these formulas, to be living, should be, and should remain, adapted to the faith and to him who believes. Wherefore if for any reason this adaptation should cease to exist, they lose their first meaning and accordingly must be changed. And since the character and lot of dogmatic formulas is so precarious, there is no room for surprise that Modernists regard them so lightly and in such open disrespect.”
Pascendi dominici gregis is a bit of a tough go, but if you want to understand what’s happening in the Vatican, it’s the most important reading you can do.
Understand that Pope Pius X calls “religious formulas” the very precise and determined way – the extremely exacting terminology – that the Church uses to teach her doctrines so that absolutely no misunderstanding or error, no deformation whether deliberate or inadvertent, can come into it. Language counts in theology, perhaps more than any other field.
Which is why Bergoglio’s loosey-goosey way of speaking is the biggest sign that he’s doing this deliberately. He certainly know the religious formulas, but never loses an opportunity to twist them or even mock and ridicule those who still hold them, deliberately creating a kind of squid-ink of confusion with his words, to cover what he is doing with what he is saying. But he’s also very big into signals of what he’s thinking, hints. Though he also likes to use opposed and conflicting gestures and signals to do the work of confusion-creation.
His having today slipped in the little one-liner of being the “bishop dressed in white” is, I think, an example of this.
Hail Mother of Mercy,
lady dressed in white!
In this place where, 100 years ago,
you showed us all
the plans of mercy of our God,
I look at your garment of light
and, as a bishop dressed in white,
I remember all those who,
dressed in their white baptismal robes,
want to live in God
And then the inevitable swing back to his political interests:
Thus, we will travel all the roads,
we will be pilgrims on all paths,
we will tear down all walls
and overcome all boundaries,
going to all peripheries,
there revealing God’s justice and peace.
We will be, in the joy of the Gospel,
a church dressed in white,
You get the gist. He knows what every Fatima follower knows: that the “bishop dressed in white” is the pope in the “third secret” who keeps the faith and is murdered for it. He’s positioning himself as the victim-pope, stoically, doggedly moving “forward, always forward” with his big plans, unjustly attacked on all sides by us mean people who are always shooting our rigid little arrows at him.
In one sense, of course, his perpetual stream of heretical filth and blasphemy matters very much. And in the sense that’s most important, as an offence against God and a violation of the first three commandments. But in terms of listening to it all in order to figure out what he’s about, why he’s doing what he’s doing, the actual words he speaks are more or less meaningless.
Always remember Hilary’s Pope Francis 24-hour Rule: Don’t like something he’s said? Wait a day. He’ll say exactly the opposite tomorrow.